Gah I feel sad reading this because I’ve developed an extremely similar thought process because I’ve gone through extremely similar experiences.
As another little model that you may enjoy, one thing I’m thinking a lot about these days, is to see people through the lens of the opposite of their vulnerabilities. My last girlfriend told me she felt really stupid around me, and this was one big insecurity that damaged the relationship. Reflecting back, I think I shouldn’t have just tried to focus on the ways she was smart and praise her for it, I should have thought of her as “intelligent”, plain and simple, and acted accordingly. That would’ve made me act like she’s smart, and I’d consider all of her opinions and bestow dignity upon her naturally. But that also would require me to let go of my standards for what “smart” is. Anyone can be smart, but what’s most important is to focus on the quality of “smart” when talking to anyone who feels like they’re insecure about that quality. That doesn’t mean you grant them authority, but you can give them a sense of emotional safety. This can apply to any quality.
I really like this. Great framing (ha!). I’ve long felt that the ability/skill/whatever to “try on an idea” is both very important and a bit under discussed/underrated.
I also love that you literally have a document with different frames saved to reference.
You mention that "switching frames" is a way to solve the problem of resistance to *agreeing* with someone whose beliefs or attitudes you'd normally reject. But tactically, how might we do that? Do you have a toy example?
Sure, thanks for asking. It’ll look different if you’re just trying to deescalate a one-off interaction vs. in the context of a relationship.
If you’re in an argument with someone you don’t know well, you can calm yourself with the knowledge that you’ll be returning to your own frame soon. You can even jot down a few notes to yourself quickly before you start. Then turn your curiosity towards their frame - either pondering to yourself or asking them questions to get at their underlying concerns. Like, in their anti-polyamory frame, what are they afraid they’d lose by opening up a relationship? Are they concerned they’ll never feel special or their primary partner might find someone they love more? Acknowledging those fears will calm the person down, so you can maintain civility.
In a relationship, it’s more of a spoken, agreed-upon thing. You’ll want to take turns applying curiosity to each other’s frames, knowing you’ll both have a chance to be heard. And that it’s not a contest about who is right - that both frames get to exist and the important part is that you acknowledge each other’s underlying fears and desires.
Gah I feel sad reading this because I’ve developed an extremely similar thought process because I’ve gone through extremely similar experiences.
As another little model that you may enjoy, one thing I’m thinking a lot about these days, is to see people through the lens of the opposite of their vulnerabilities. My last girlfriend told me she felt really stupid around me, and this was one big insecurity that damaged the relationship. Reflecting back, I think I shouldn’t have just tried to focus on the ways she was smart and praise her for it, I should have thought of her as “intelligent”, plain and simple, and acted accordingly. That would’ve made me act like she’s smart, and I’d consider all of her opinions and bestow dignity upon her naturally. But that also would require me to let go of my standards for what “smart” is. Anyone can be smart, but what’s most important is to focus on the quality of “smart” when talking to anyone who feels like they’re insecure about that quality. That doesn’t mean you grant them authority, but you can give them a sense of emotional safety. This can apply to any quality.
I really like this. Great framing (ha!). I’ve long felt that the ability/skill/whatever to “try on an idea” is both very important and a bit under discussed/underrated.
I also love that you literally have a document with different frames saved to reference.
You mention that "switching frames" is a way to solve the problem of resistance to *agreeing* with someone whose beliefs or attitudes you'd normally reject. But tactically, how might we do that? Do you have a toy example?
Sure, thanks for asking. It’ll look different if you’re just trying to deescalate a one-off interaction vs. in the context of a relationship.
If you’re in an argument with someone you don’t know well, you can calm yourself with the knowledge that you’ll be returning to your own frame soon. You can even jot down a few notes to yourself quickly before you start. Then turn your curiosity towards their frame - either pondering to yourself or asking them questions to get at their underlying concerns. Like, in their anti-polyamory frame, what are they afraid they’d lose by opening up a relationship? Are they concerned they’ll never feel special or their primary partner might find someone they love more? Acknowledging those fears will calm the person down, so you can maintain civility.
In a relationship, it’s more of a spoken, agreed-upon thing. You’ll want to take turns applying curiosity to each other’s frames, knowing you’ll both have a chance to be heard. And that it’s not a contest about who is right - that both frames get to exist and the important part is that you acknowledge each other’s underlying fears and desires.
Does that make sense?
Totally — ty Ann!